Madras HC Directs Police To Permit Kulamangalam Goat-Butting Event On Nov 1, Subject To Safety Conditions And Required Certificates

In brief

The question

1. Whether the District Collector’s impugned order should be set aside in light of earlier decisions permitting Kidaa Muttu events subject to conditions.

The court held

The writ petition was allowed. The impugned order was set aside.

It also directed

The third respondent was directed to issue proceedings permitting the petitioner to hold the event subject to appropriate conditions and the required certificates.

01Facts

The petitioner challenged the District Collector’s order dated 21 September 2026 concerning permission to conduct a “Kidaa Muttu Function” at Kulamangalam, Madurai District, on 1 November 2026.

p. 1 · p. 2 · ¶ 1

He sought to have the order quashed and to be permitted to hold the event with police protection.

p. 1 · p. 2 · ¶ 1

The Court considered earlier decisions permitting similar events subject to conditions.

pp. 2–4 · ¶ 2–4

02Issues

i.1. Whether the District Collector’s impugned order should be set aside in light of earlier decisions permitting Kidaa Muttu events subject to conditions.

pp. 2–5 · ¶ 2–5

ii.2. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to conduct the event subject to safeguards and required certificates.

p. 5 · ¶ 5

03Law Applied

The Court exercised its writ jurisdiction under Article 226, under which it may review the challenged administrative order and grant appropriate relief.

p. 1

Relying on prior Madras High Court decisions, including W.P. (MD) No. 16489 of 2025, W.P. (MD) No. 15410 of 2024, and the Division Bench order in W.P. (MD) No. 9597 of 2025, the Court treated the event as one that may be permitted subject to appropriate conditions.

pp. 2–4 · ¶ 2–4

The conditions reproduced from W.P. (MD) No. 528 of 2022 included veterinary supervision, measures to prevent injury or intoxication of the goats, precautions against untoward incidents, and an undertaking by the organisers to comply with the conditions.

pp. 3–4 · ¶ 4

04Reasoning

The Court relied on its prior decisions allowing Kidaa Muttu events subject to safeguards, rather than treating the event as categorically impermissible.

pp. 2–4 · ¶ 2–4

Applying that approach, it set aside the Collector’s order and directed the Inspector of Police to issue proceedings permitting the event with appropriate conditions. It additionally required the petitioner to furnish veterinary, revenue, fire-safety and electricity certificates, as well as the landlord’s no-objection certificate.

p. 5 · ¶ 5

05Holding

The writ petition was allowed. The impugned order was set aside.

p. 5 · ¶ 5–6

The third respondent was directed to issue proceedings permitting the petitioner to hold the event subject to appropriate conditions and the required certificates.

p. 5 · ¶ 5–6

LawLens.Madras High Court

Original Court PDF